In Brief
The case involves a dispute between two mutts (religious institutions) over property rights and the scope of appellate review. The High Court had allowed the respondent's applications to adduce additional evidence and remanded the entire case to the trial court for fresh decision. The Supreme Court held that while the High Court was correct in allowing the applications for additional evidence, it was wrong to relegate the parties to the trial court. Instead, the appellate court should direct the lower appellate court to record the additional evidence and return findings to the high court, which would then decide the appeal on the substantial questions of law already framed.
The lawyer headnote and full judgment text are available to registered users.